Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 312 posts

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#111

Post by cstross »

revscat wrote: post #74
tomrod wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until when? The next large asteroid? The next close-by gamma burst? The sun goes nova? Let's go see the universe, and take life along with us.

That's not going to happen with chemical rockets. Until a radically different propulsion system is developed the only planet we have is this one.

Actually, it could happen with chemical rockets -- if we abandon the idea of sending canned monkeys beyond the atmosphere.

We can afford to send up a couple of hundred tons of prokaryotic spores every year until the cows come home, with solar sails to get their packages up above solar escape velocity. Over a few decades or centuries that's a lot of unicellular organisms to scatter on the direction of exoplanets; we can hope that in a few million years one or another strikes edible dirt and begins to reproduce.

This is, however, not as mythically resonant as "space: the final frontier" ...

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#112

Post by ChuckMcM »

mixmax wrote: post #23

What this weeks events show us is that space travel is hard. Really hard. Most systems operate in extreme conditions, sometimes bordering on the improbable. Thousands, sometimes millions of horsepower in an engine smaller than a car, cryogenic liquids at -200 degrees celsius cooling a nozzle that is 3000 degrees celsius 5 millimeters away, heatshields designed to absorb obscene amounts of heat, the list just goes on…

It also shows that the crew capsule doesn't survive rapid dissassembly of the engine. Which is another thing to work on. Sad to see this so quickly on the heels of the Orbital failure.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#113

Post by avmich »

JanSolo wrote: post #18

This is very bad. Not just for the family and friends of the poor guy who died, but for commercial manned spaceflight in general. SpaceshipTwo is considered the 'simplest' and 'safest' of all the upcoming manned commercial vehicle. It has many features that should help keep it reliable. For example, instead of a real liquid rocket engine, it uses a hybrid engine; it has almost no moving parts apart from a valve or tw…

> SpaceshipTwo is considered the 'simplest' and 'safest' of all the upcoming manned commercial vehicle.

XCOR's culture of safety is pretty good, though it's the school of thought quite close to Virgin Galactic . At least rocket engines in XCOR are designed with the highest standards of safety.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#114

Post by Luc »

tdicola wrote: post #89
DanBC wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apollo program, which was well managed and had no in-flight failures that resulted in loss of life The flaws in Apollo One were so severe the three crew died on the launchpad. Describing that tragedy as "no in-flight deaths" is accurate but misses some important information. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_1

Not to mention there were certainly other problems with Apollo like mission 13, or 11 barely landing before running out of fuel (computer problem forced Armstrong to take manual control and find a new landing spot at the last minute). Ultimately though Apollo was just too big and expensive a program to maintain, for better or worse.

> computer problem forced Armstrong to take manual control and find a new landing spot at the last minute

The computer kept flying the machine despite the interrupts and reboots due to the radar switch that Buzz had left on. It was really marvelously designed to be able to keep on executing its highest priority tasks.

The reason for the (semi) manual control was that the designated landing spot was a boulder field. The computer kept on operating the throttle.

Source: Apollo 11 Lunar Surface Journal.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#115

Post by venomsnake »

sliverstorm wrote: post #92
marze wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some say this is an "inevitable" result of pushing boundaries. No. This is the result of a poorly managed program. What they are doing is much easier than the Apollo program, which was well managed and had no in-flight failures that resulted in loss of life, while accomplishing an infinitely harder task. This is a tragedy, obviously. But the program is about six years behind schedule, been going for 10 years. The mos…

Some say this is an "inevitable" result of pushing boundaries. No. This is the result of a poorly managed program. Some of the boundaries that are being pushed are how much oversight, how meticulous, etc you have to be. In other words, how well you have to manage the program, how tight a ship you keep. Keeping a tight ship raises costs, and isn't the big emphasis of all this privatized space travel on reducing costs?

Costs are fixed. It is up to the culture to choose whether to pay in blood or treasure.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#116

Post by sliverstorm »

x0054 wrote: post #108
sliverstorm wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some say this is an "inevitable" result of pushing boundaries. No. This is the result of a poorly managed program. Some of the boundaries that are being pushed are how much oversight, how meticulous, etc you have to be. In other words, how well you have to manage the program, how tight a ship you keep. Keeping a tight ship raises costs, and isn't the big emphasis of all this privatized space travel on reducing costs?

That's a really grate way to sell tickets: "We now know just how careless we can be to limit in flight explosions to just one per year!" You can't use the same attitude that's now common in software startups with space vehicles, or any vehicles for that matter. "Ship now and fix problems later" does not work with real world products, and to be honest, should be avoided in software as well.

That's one of the big ways the private sector cuts costs! Where do you imagine the "fat" that the private sector trims (relative to gov't) comes from?

The private sector isn't somehow just better at stuff. It has different motives and different priorities, and makes different compromises.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#117

Post by jaredmcdonald »

nether wrote: post #43
mixmax wrote: post #23

What this weeks events show us is that space travel is hard. Really hard. Most systems operate in extreme conditions, sometimes bordering on the improbable. Thousands, sometimes millions of horsepower in an engine smaller than a car, cryogenic liquids at -200 degrees celsius cooling a nozzle that is 3000 degrees celsius 5 millimeters away, heatshields designed to absorb obscene amounts of heat, the list just goes on…

> cryogenic liquids at -300 degrees celsius Absolute zero is -273 °C.

now that is pushing boundaries

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#118

Post by rdtsc »

JanSolo wrote: post #18

This is very bad. Not just for the family and friends of the poor guy who died, but for commercial manned spaceflight in general. SpaceshipTwo is considered the 'simplest' and 'safest' of all the upcoming manned commercial vehicle. It has many features that should help keep it reliable. For example, instead of a real liquid rocket engine, it uses a hybrid engine; it has almost no moving parts apart from a valve or tw…

Well Soyuz still flies and has exceptionally low human fatality rates in the last decades. So if safetey realiability is desired it could be just "buy a ride on a Souyz" for now.

I think it won't be that dire. People who sign up to fly into space on a new design would probably be aware of the risks involved.

Many people still climb Everest, dive into caves, and jump from clifs with wingsuits. I think there won't be a shortage and the future is bright and exciting.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#119

Post by [deleted] »

venomsnake wrote: post #115
sliverstorm wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some say this is an "inevitable" result of pushing boundaries. No. This is the result of a poorly managed program. Some of the boundaries that are being pushed are how much oversight, how meticulous, etc you have to be. In other words, how well you have to manage the program, how tight a ship you keep. Keeping a tight ship raises costs, and isn't the big emphasis of all this privatized space travel on reducing costs?

Costs are fixed. It is up to the culture to choose whether to pay in blood or treasure.

[deleted]

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#120

Post by atlantic »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #100
atlantic wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. I expected the downvotes. But it breaks my heart that we have such a beautiful planet and we treat it like a trash heap, all the while dreaming of Mars and whatnot. Let's put our own house in order before we go off travelling.

There's no reason for everybody to stay home and do housekeeping, then there's a big beautiful universe out there. Dare to dream big!

If we can't even save our own home world, there is every reason to believe that we will do damage elsewhere. That being the case, best to stay home until we grow up a bit.
Post reply on HN